Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.security.misc > #1407
| From | Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.security.misc, comp.internet.services.google, comp.misc, alt.privacy |
| Subject | Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently |
| Date | 2019-01-28 07:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <q2mcjc.v4.1@nieveler.org> (permalink) |
| References | <q2gp9t$j8o$2@neodome.net> <q2i74b.590.1@nieveler.org> <q2ipm9$ol0$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
On 27.01.2019 00:15, Rich wrote: > In comp.misc Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 26.01.2019 05:56, !!Credit wrote: >>> Google engineers have proposed changes to the open-source Chromium >>> browser that will break content-blocking extensions, including ad >>> blockers. >> >> It will also break data-stealing malware extensions though - which is >> the point of the change > > The solution there, however, is not to remove the API, but to add a > "grant only" permissions system such that the end user has to grant an > extension the right to use the API. Indeed, that would be the far better choice > Those installing uMatrix or uBlockOrigin will naturally want to "allow" > both to access the API. But if some other extension, that does not > need such access, asks to be granted, then the user has the choice of > denying such access. I wouldn't leave the decision with the users... I'd allow it depending on the category the extension was put in in the app store. That way, all extensions that want to use such elevated priviledges would be far more obvious, AND could be subject to more scrutiny without overloading the review system. Leaving the decision just with the enduser means just another exercise in social engineering - you already got the user to want to install your extension anyway (manual extension installs were already disabled a while ago, weren't they?), so you just need a convincing argument to explain to the user why you want those permissions that Google is warning you could do bad things.
Back to comp.security.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently "!!Credit" <payroll@qi3.com> - 2019-01-26 04:56 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-01-26 10:54 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently outlook shitemail <microsuck@msn.com> - 2019-01-26 13:14 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2019-02-01 00:25 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2019-02-01 00:37 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-01 00:58 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2019-02-01 11:48 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2019-02-01 14:10 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-01 00:54 +0000
Pi-hole (Was: Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently) snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2019-02-01 11:48 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-02-01 07:59 +0100
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2019-02-01 11:48 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Doug McIntyre <merlyn@dork.geeks.org> - 2019-02-01 09:00 -0600
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-02-02 02:05 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently tom <tom@0.0.0.0> - 2019-02-17 11:42 -0800
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-17 20:24 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Pabst Blue Ribbon <pabst@blue.ribbon> - 2019-02-18 11:27 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-18 11:35 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-02-18 21:57 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-02-18 22:33 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-02-18 21:46 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-26 17:58 +0100
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-01-26 23:15 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2019-01-26 23:22 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-01-27 11:09 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-28 08:01 +0100
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-28 07:56 +0100
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-01-28 11:26 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-28 15:11 +0100
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2019-01-27 19:58 +0100
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently Juergen Nieveler <Juergen.Nieveler@gmail.com> - 2019-01-28 08:03 +0100
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-01-30 22:01 +0000
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2019-01-30 15:34 -0800
Re: Wow, fancy that. Web ad giant Google to block ad-blockers in Chrome. For safety, apparently suge0025@gmail.com - 2019-06-18 15:53 -0700
csiph-web